Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010249742024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/651/2024 EASTERN ENVO PROJECT REP BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER LAKSHMI MITRA, PROGOTI COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, (OPP. PANTALOONS), G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI- 781022, KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM VERSUS 2) MR. ABHIJIT SARMA THE SUPERINTENDENT CUM MEMBER SECRETARY, GAUHATI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL, GUWAHATI-781032. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S S S RAHMAN, MS B H SHIRIN,MS S Z HAYAT Advocate for the Respondent : MR. B GOGOI (R2), MR M BHUYAN (R2),MR. D UPAMANYA (R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER 22.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. S.S.S. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2. 2. The petitioner has filed the present contempt petition due to con- compliance with the direction passed in the judgment and order dated Page No.# 2/4 19.07.2024 in WP(C) 2704/2022, wherein this Court had directed the respondent authorities and more particularly the respondent nos.1 & 3 in the writ petition, to take appropriate steps to carry out the necessary verification, as regard the petitioner’s contractual entitlements. It further held that if it was found that the petitioner was entitled to the amount of Rs.1,43,61,600/- or any part thereof, the same should be paid within 4 (four) months from the date of receipt of the judgment and order dated 19.07.2024 passed in WP(C) 2704/2022. 3. The petitioner’s case in WP(C) 2704/2022 was that despite the petitioner having entered into an agreement with the Superintendent, Office of the Hospital Management Society, Guwahati Medical College Hospital (GMCH), for the purpose of operation and maintenance of all mechanical and electrical equipments of the existing sewage treatment plant of GMCH, the petitioner had not been paid his contractual dues amounting to Rs.1,43,61,600/-. It was in view of the prayer made by the petitioner in the writ petition for recovery of his contractual dues, that the said direction had been made by this Court in WP(C) 2704/2022. 4. Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that a verification has been done in terms of the judgment and order dated 19.07.2024 passed in WP(C) 2704/2022, wherein it was found that the petitioner was to be paid a sum of Rs.31,26,897/- for the period 01.03.2022 to 04.08.2024. However, due to various adjustments to be made in terms of the agreement made between the parties, it was found that it is the petitioner who has to pay the State Government Rs.19,43,103/- and the respondents as such, do not have any dues payable to the petitioner. In this regard, Mr. B. Gogoi has submitted letter Page No.# 3/4 no. MCH/849/2024/377 dated 19.05.2025 issued by the Superintendent, GMCH addressed to the petitioner, making a demand for payment of Rs.19,43,103/- in continuation of the Show-Cause Notice dated 29.04.2025. 5. Mr. B. Gogoi further submits that the respondent no.2 could not file an affidavit, as he is in Guwahati availing Earned Leave. The respondent no.2 had undergone a Kidney Transplant and his leave was w.e.f. 10.04.2025 to 15.07.2025. 6. Mr. S.S.S. Rahman, on the other hand submits that the petitioner has submitted his reply to the Show-Cause Notice dated 29.04.2025, vide reply dated 08.05.2025. He also submits that the calculation on the basis of which a verification had been made by the respondent no.2 was incorrect and the same should not be considered, as the petitioner is to be paid his contractual dues. 7. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 8. As can be seen from the judgment and order dated 19.07.2024 passed in WP(C) 2704/2022, this Court had directed the respondents to carry out a verification, as regards the petitioner’s claim for payment of his contractual dues amounting to Rs.1,43,61,600/-. It was also directed by this Court that if it was found that the petitioner was entitled to any amount, the same should be paid. The above thus shows that the contractual amount claimed by the petitioner was to be verified. However, vide the letter dated 19.05.2025 issued by the Superintendent, GMCH, there is a reverse claim of Rs.19,43,103/- from the GMCH to the petitioner, after adjusting the Rs.31,26,897/-, which was payable by the GMCH to the petitioner. Page No.# 4/4 9. The letter dated 19.05.2025 issued by the Superintendent, GMCH and it’s Annexures is made a part of the record and marked as Annexure-X Collectively. 10. On considering the fact that there are disputed questions of facts, with regard to the correctness of the verification and calculation made in terms of the letter dated 19.05.2025 issued by the Superintendent, GMCH, this Court is of the view that the petitioner would have to make a challenge to the same by way of an appropriate petition. This contempt case cannot decide as to whether the verification and calculation made with regard to the petitioner’s contractual dues, as reflected in the letter dated 19.05.2025 issued by the Superintendent, GMCH, is correct or not, as the only issue to be decided in a contempt case, is as to whether the directions passed has been intentionally violated. 11. This Court thus finds that the direction passed in WP(C) 2704/2022 vide judgment and order dated 19.07.2024 has been complied with. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands closed, with liberty being given to the petitioner to make a challenge to the letter dated 19.05.2025 issued by the Superintendent, GMCH, before an appropriate forum by way of an appropriate petition, if so advised. JUDGE Comparing Assistant